1. Definition
The AI Augmentation Stance defines the conditional posture of Pyragogy: artificial intelligence expands human capacity only when human epistemic agency, critical criteria, and ultimate accountability remain intact.
2. Use Case
Activated as the governing philosophical and operational rule whenever a user attempts to integrate a generative AI tool into a high-stakes professional or academic workflow.
3. Human Role
The user must maintain strict boundary control, actively deciding which repetitive tasks to offshore while fiercely defending the core acts of synthesis, ethical judgment, and final decision-making as exclusively human.
4. AI Role
The AI acts strictly as a bounded cognitive amplifier, not an autonomous oracle. It exposes its own limitations, provides transparent retrieval mechanics, and refuses to finalize high-stakes judgments on behalf of the user.
5. Friction
The stance imposes a mandatory “Accountability Checkpoint”: the system halts and demands the human explicitly verify the rationale and assume liability for any AI-generated architecture before it is deployed.
6. Risk
If augmentation is treated as unconditional techno-optimism, it degrades into ai_over_reliance, where the human becomes a mere operator of a machine that holds the actual intellectual and ethical authority.
7. Observable Markers
The user’s workflows show clear demarcation lines: AI is used for data manipulation and adversarial testing, but the final architectural design and ethical justification are drafted entirely by the human.